Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Zaratustra]

Did you see the coverage of Obama on the latest debate? He was stuttering like a fool, Colbert even highlighted it. The Presidency requires leadership and poise.

America needs a WARTIME PRESIDENT

[Guild]

McCain will pull out the troops. This war will end because it's stupid and we all know it. He's not going to have a choice.

[Thad]

Did you see the coverage of Obama on the latest debate? He was stuttering like a fool, Colbert even highlighted it. The Presidency requires leadership and poise, which to me means a President who doesn't know the difference between Sunnis and Shi'ites.

[James Edward Smith]

Did you see the coverage of Obama on the latest debate? He was stuttering like a fool, Colbert even highlighted it. The Presidency requires leadership and poise.

As someone who has a speech impediment and therefore probably stutters a lot more than Obama, 

[Royal☭]

Yeah and you're also a foreigner.

[Mongrel]

As someone who has a speech impediment and therefore probably stutters a lot

You really don't. Not to say the impairment isn't there, but you've mastered it well enough that in all the time I've known you I can't recall even a single occasion where it significantly affected a conversation.

[Kazz]

I talk to Geo on Vent all the time and I've never, ever heard him stutter.

He does lag though.  Perhaps his speech impediment causes latency problems.  Is that some sort of piss-poor X-Men power, Geo?

re: Obama stuttering

If I had to repeat the same thing over and over and over again in a billion places in front of a billion people, knowing all the time that the slightest, tiniest slip-up could be recorded and played over and over and over again on 24-hour news networks in order to make me look like an idiot, I'd probably go fucking insane.  Obama's a good man; I don't envy what running for President is putting him through.

Did you see the coverage of Obama on the latest debate? He was stuttering like a fool, Colbert even highlighted it. The Presidency requires leadership and poise, which to me means a President who doesn't know the difference between Sunnis and Shi'ites.

Thad, I hate to say it, but if it were between two candidates, and all other things were the same, the candidate who knew less about Muslims would probably win.

[AČ]

Kazz touches on what I've been screaming since I was like, 7, about people who harp on speech slipups.

The eyes of the entire fucking nation are on you, like some vulture, analyzing where you go, what you eat, where you take a dump, what the dump is of, and everything else. That'd make anyone nervous.


As for the stimulus:

If you filed taxes, you get it.
It's not an advance on next year's return - your tax return next year will not be affected in any way, shape, or form
It's not some loan - you won't be paying it back directly. (I just know Thad or someone is going to give us a list of how we're going to be slowly paying it back over the next few years economics blah blah ronald regan)

It is, quite literally, free money. Go nuts.

[Guild]

On stuttering: I should have used different words. Obama used ums and like and other hesitation words and just generally came across as ignorant.

T: Thad IMO it's a better idea to have a man experienced with diplomatic conversation than an intellect. Not to say that intelligence isn't important (see W) but it's considerably more important for a leader to know what to say to the person with the information to get THEM to do the dirty work than for the leader himself (or herself) to actually know something trivial*.

As an answer to the question "How many quarters would it take to fill the empire state building" an engineer might quote you a number. A good manager will answer simply "lots." Obama unfortunately choked, something which I believe McCain wouldn't do. He'd smile and say "Well I don't know for sure, sonny. Let's ask an expert."

*the questions in question weren't especially trivial.

P.S. There is no such thing as free money.

[Thad]

Thad, I hate to say it, but if it were between two candidates, and all other things were the same, the candidate who knew less about Muslims would probably win.

Er yes, well, I suppose if you strip away the fact that McCain's entire campaign consists of supporting a wildly unpopular war and running on his foreign policy credentials, then no, the fact that he doesn't actually know who the fuck we're fighting is probably not very relevant.  Also, the economy wouldn't be so bad if more people had jobs and were making better money, and if my grandmother had wheels she'd be a bus.

Clinton uses this rhetorical tactic all the time, and you have to hand it to her, she's right: if she weren't losing, she'd be winning.

...Anyway.  The reason I could never run for President is that, if asked a question like "Do you think Reverend Wright loves America as much as you do?" I would have responded with, "Are you fucking KIDDING me?"  And after twenty minutes of questions like that, I would have told them to call me when they were ready to stop wasting my time, and walked off the stage.

T: Thad IMO it's a better idea to have a man experienced with diplomatic conversation than an intellect. Not to say that intelligence isn't important (see W) but it's considerably more important for a leader to know what to say to the person with the information to get THEM to do the dirty work than for the leader himself (or herself) to actually know something trivial*.

I'm not getting up McCain's ass for losing Final Jeopardy, you twat, I'm suggesting that perhaps knowing the difference between Iran and al Qaeda might be fucking relevant to FIGHTING A WAR IN THE MIDDLE EAST.

As an answer to the question "How many quarters would it take to fill the empire state building" an engineer might quote you a number. A good manager will answer simply "lots."

And what we need right now is an MBA President.

EDIT: Split-merged.

[Guild]

THAD'S DISAPPEARING POST: ON FIGHTING BIG WAR: But I already told you, we won't be. He's pulling the troops out. He just doesn't know it yet.

And no, we never never need an MBA President. They give MBAs out to people who do lots of paperwork while the leaders get laid.

We need that guy who can walk into a room and speak for hours without saying anything at all. Bush's problem was that he felt the need to say things all damn day. His whole cabinet is full of big talking fucks who can sit in secret rooms plotting torture with no shame.

I'm sorry but knowing the difference between two similar factions is not nearly as important as having the instinct to know people well enough never to make such goddamn stupid choices to begin with.

[Thad]

THAD'S DISAPPEARING POST: ON FIGHTING BIG WAR: But I already told you, we won't be. He's pulling the troops out. He just doesn't know it yet.

You say he's going to pull us out of Iraq.  I say he's more likely to attack Iran.  If you want to fall back on his record to look for whose viewpoint it supports, please feel free.

We need that guy who can walk into a room and speak for hours without saying anything at all.

So you're saying we need a President who pulls us out of a war because public opinion forces him to, and who is a good speaker who doesn't actually know shit about shit.  In other words, Nixon and Reagan rolled into one.  Sounds wonderful!

I'm sorry but knowing the difference between two similar factions is not nearly as important as having the instinct to know people well enough never to make such goddamn stupid choices to begin with.

Yes, because McCain's record in this war is so fucking sterling.

[SCD]

On the war:  I would find it hard for a politician to make the call at this point regarding Iraq, when you have a General out there whose name should be on the Roll for Civilization 5.  Now that the Iraqis are calling the shots (and failing, for now...) this foreigner would strongly advocate one more year before troop reductions to no less than 75% for the following year. 

On McCain:  His support for the tax cuts he once barked at makes me  .  I am also getting jives of protectionism as well as less of himself speaking the opinions.  More to follow on that in the coming weeks. 

On Iran:  The Generals understand this better than anybody.  You have deployed your strategic reserve.  Your nation does not have the capacity to sustain ground operations against Tehran.  While some people may as a second resort suggest using Air Power to cripple Iran's military/nuke power base, they really should ask Clinton how that worked out in Afghanistan in response to the USS Cole, although chances are if they live in New York, they already know how that worked out in the long run..

[Thad]

On the war:  I would find it hard for a politician to make the call at this point regarding Iraq, when you have a General out there whose name should be on the Roll for Civilization 5.  Now that the Iraqis are calling the shots (and failing, for now...) this foreigner would strongly advocate one more year before troop reductions to no less than 75% for the following year.

A year from now, or a year from January when the next President takes office?

On McCain:  His support for the tax cuts he once barked at makes me  .  I am also getting jives of protectionism as well as less of himself speaking the opinions.  More to follow on that in the coming weeks.

He's fucking sold out, is what he's done.  He's compromised his views on the tax cuts, the religious right, campaign finance reform, and for fuck's sake TORTURE.  The man has no integrity left.

Can you imagine Barry Goldwater cozying up to Nixon the way McCain has cozied up to Bush?  It's unthinkable.

Of course, the obvious response is that Goldwater got his ass handed to him when he ran for President.  Integrity is a good way to lose an election, and nobody knows that better than McCain.  Except possibly Kerry.

(Edit: The above rhetorical question presupposing general knowledge of Barry Goldwater is directed more toward the Americans in the audience; I don't really expect you foreign folks to be familiar with the maverick Arizona Senator who ran for President in '64.  Hell, out-of-staters might not know who he was either.  ...Actually, if I were to be brutally honest, I really doubt a random sample of students at the ASU Computing Commons would find many people who recognized his name, and that lobby has his fucking picture on the wall.  So, all right, relevant Wikipedia links: Goldwater bio, 1964 election.  Guild, please at least skim those before you ask me to explain who he is.

...Actually, I'm going to add Mr. Conservative: Goldwater on Goldwater to my queue right now.  That looked good.)

On Iran:  The Generals understand this better than anybody.  You have deployed your strategic reserve.  Your nation does not have the capacity to sustain ground operations against Tehran.  While some people may as a second resort suggest using Air Power to cripple Iran's military/nuke power base, they really should ask Clinton how that worked out in Afghanistan in response to the USS Cole, although chances are if they live in New York, they already know how that worked out in the long run..

Oh, I didn't for a second suggest that it would be a good idea or something that we could win.  But then, neither is Iraq.

The question is, is McCain crazy enough to bomb Iran?  And my answer is, well, he's crazy enough to joke about it.

[Brentai]

Thad, I hate to say it, but if it were between two candidates, and all other things were the same, the candidate who knew less about Muslims would probably win.

Er yes, well, I suppose if you strip away the fact that McCain's entire campaign consists of supporting a wildly unpopular war and running on his foreign policy credentials, then no, the fact that he doesn't actually know who the fuck we're fighting is probably not very relevant.

It isn't to the beer-swilling NASCAR fans who keep putting jackasses like him in charge, confident that he'll keep killing them heathen sand niggers and not sweat about their stupid little culture.

That's what Kazz meant.

[Kazz]

Indeed.

I'm really not worried about how well-informed, thoughtful people perceive one side or the other; neither are smart campaigns.

[Thad]

Thad, I hate to say it, but if it were between two candidates, and all other things were the same, the candidate who knew less about Muslims would probably win.

Er yes, well, I suppose if you strip away the fact that McCain's entire campaign consists of supporting a wildly unpopular war and running on his foreign policy credentials, then no, the fact that he doesn't actually know who the fuck we're fighting is probably not very relevant.

It isn't to the beer-swilling NASCAR fans who keep putting jackasses like him in charge, confident that he'll keep killing them heathen sand niggers and not sweat about their stupid little culture.

That's what Kazz meant.

Um, yes, if you limit your scope to the people who will vote for him no matter what he says or does, then things McCain says and does will not affect whether people vote for him.

And if the Queen had balls, she'd be the King.

[Brentai]

It's as if you live in an alternate reality where Bush did not just serve an 8-year term.

[Kazz]

Can I visit?  It sounds wonderful.

[Thad]

It's as if you live in an alternate reality where Bush did not just serve an 8-year term.

Maybe you missed the part where public opinion of the war is not the same now as it was in 2004.

But please, do go on.  I know absolutely nothing about the sort of people who are inclined to vote for John McCain no matter what.  That is a subject I sorely need some background in.